Adamantine wrote:There are many problems you can find in institutionalized Tibetan Buddhism...

I can't speak to the Sanghas you frequent since I do not know them, apart from Shenphen Rinpoche, and I know he is a good guy. I really do have full confidence in him.

But...this is a pervasive problem in dharma centers in the West. To think otherwise is to be ignorant. I personally know instances (yes plural) of woman pressured to have abortions after they have been impregnated by their teachers.

One of the problems is a corrupted idea of samaya -- women subject to harrasment, etc. in Tibetan Buddhist dharma centers feel silenced by "vows" and so they do not speak up for many reasons.

Namdrol wrote:But...this is a pervasive problem in dharma centers in the West. To think otherwise is to be ignorant. I personally know instances (yes plural) of woman pressured to have abortions after they have been impregnated by their teachers.

That's really disturbing. I wonder why you keep the names quiet. It seems people should know what teachers are doing things like this so they can stay away. This is why we are supposed to examine our teachers before taking them on in any samaya context. There have been plenty of teachers in the history of Vajrayana that disgraced the role of Guru and/or were never qualified in the first place. The reason Chogyur Lingpa revealed terma publically in front of hundreds of people was to display the authenticity of the terma because there were so many fake tertons running around. As long as samsara exists there will be false teachers (even if they are 'qualified' in other ways, if they act the way you describe above than they are not fit to be guiding others). Outright charlatans, mistaken tulkus, and even once-bodhisattvas who have fallen from the lower bhumis-- there are many flavors of imperfection to choose from. This is not a problem with the Dharma, this is a problem with people using the Dharma to fulfill and inflame their 5 poisons that they haven't yet purified. This is samsara. As long as samsaric beings inhabit Dharma institutions which in turn inhabit samsaric realms, there will be problems, especially and increasingly in the degenerate age that we are in. These things were predicted by Guru Rinpoche and others. Obviously this doesn't mean to accept these things and not attempt to stop them or improve them-- but it is important to see it in perspective, and not contaminate views of authentic and pure teachers based on some bad examples. Anyway, the Dalai Lama himself asks people to expose any Lamas or teachers who act in unscrupulous ways such as what you describe, so I would hope you'd do so. This is one of the main cultural issues with Tibetan Buddhism that is problematic-- not that these things are considered OK, or condoned- but because in their culture they don't like to expose them or talk about them- they prefer to deal with it behind-the-scenes.. This certainly makes it hard to properly investigate a teacher without hiring a private detective!

Contentment is the ultimate wealth;Detachment is the final happiness. ~Sri Saraha

Namdrol wrote:But...this is a pervasive problem in dharma centers in the West. To think otherwise is to be ignorant. I personally know instances (yes plural) of woman pressured to have abortions after they have been impregnated by their teachers.

That's really disturbing. I wonder why you keep the names quiet.

It is not about the teachers, it is about protecting the women from further harm.

Namdrol wrote:But...this is a pervasive problem in dharma centers in the West. To think otherwise is to be ignorant. I personally know instances (yes plural) of woman pressured to have abortions after they have been impregnated by their teachers.

That's really disturbing. I wonder why you keep the names quiet.

It is not about the teachers, it is about protecting the women from further harm.

Then don't name the women. If you keep the teacher's names quiet, than what about all the new students that arrive, with no idea what they may be in for? History repeats, unless provoked. . .

Contentment is the ultimate wealth;Detachment is the final happiness. ~Sri Saraha

Dronma wrote:But I am also satisfied to see that Adamantine has reached at a point in which, at last, he partly admits the existence of patriarchy and sexism in Tibetan Buddhism. This is a BIG step for him, since a few pages ago he was over-defending and sanctifying everything.

Actually, I haven't reached any point- I haven't changed my tune-- if you read carefully. I never denied patriarchy in Tibetan culture, the container for the Tibetan expression of Dharma- - I've been pointing out in many ways that this is a global issue, and has only very recently improved in a minority of countries. . . as I pointed out, just over 60 years ago women in your own country still couldn't vote, and it wasn't until a little over 20 years ago the dowry was abolished. Now, Tibet was taken over by the Chinese in 1959, so we really can't say how things would have organically developed if left alone.

Moreover, I'd like to reply now to your question: "I leveled no personal attacks against you at all. Where do you see a personal attack?". You addressed me several times "arrogant, dogmatic, wacky, that my intention was cultural imperialism, about my own myopic gender-politics" etc.

I did not call you arrogant: I said your enterprise of trying to improve a language you don't even speak smelled of arrogance. It is not a personal remark: I was critiquing the action. And yes, I do believe this enterprise is one of cultural imperialism. And I never said you were wacky, I said others here thought you were: my interpretation of their comments addressed to you in this thread.

As for your last challenge if we have any great ideas about how to solve these problems... Why don't we start from [b]deleting totally the unacceptable notion: "a woman is an inferior rebirth comparing to a man"?

I don't hold this notion, never did, nor do any of my Lamas or anyone in my sangha that I am aware of. So I wonder who you think it is that is holding this notion. That said, it is certain that women have their own unique obstacles to practice, as do men. Deciding whose obstacles are greater I imagine is a crapshoot, and probably dependent on the individual. I do believe in general that women are credited with having superior potential in many ways. This is something I have heard over and over.

Contentment is the ultimate wealth;Detachment is the final happiness. ~Sri Saraha

Adamantine wrote:Then don't name the women. If you keep the teacher's names quiet, than what about all the new students that arrive, with no idea what they may be in for? History repeats, unless provoked. . .

Yup quite true. But in naming the teachers, the women will be harmed. There is just no way to avoid it. Until they are willing to go public what to do? But these women feel constrained by many issues.

Namdrol wrote:The only I have ever seen around Lamas that defies common sense is the willingness of people to lose it.

That's sad, if true. Well, you still have more life ahead of you. . .

Adamantine wrote: Your dualistic framework of "either it's this or it's that" is not quite in line with how Buddhas communicate about the nature of reality.

The Buddha's framework is "Where this exists, that exists, with the arising of that, this arose."

But there is still a lot of possibilities in that framework ...

Sönam

By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.- Longchen Rabjam -

Adamantine wrote:This is one of the main cultural issues with Tibetan Buddhism that is problematic-- not that these things are considered OK, or condoned- but because in their culture they don't like to expose them or talk about them- they prefer to deal with it behind-the-scenes.. This certainly makes it hard to properly investigate a teacher without hiring a private detective!

Yes, it is like this. Of course, nobody considers these things OK, but keeping them secret is the stereotype!

"My view is as vast as the sky, but my actions are finer than flour" ~ Padmasambhava ~

Adamantine wrote:Actually, I haven't reached any point- I haven't changed my tune-- if you read carefully. I never denied patriarchy in Tibetan culture, the container for the Tibetan expression of Dharma- - I've been pointing out in many ways that this is a global issue, and has only very recently improved in a minority of countries. . . as I pointed out, just over 60 years ago women in your own country still couldn't vote, and it wasn't until a little over 20 years ago the dowry was abolished. Now, Tibet was taken over by the Chinese in 1959, so we really can't say how things would have organically developed if left alone.

Where do you come from, Adamantine? What is your cultural background? Have you ever been in my country? You hint again and again that my country is somewhat like primitive or retrogressive.... Well, the women liberation is a movement of the 20th centrury, isn't it? In the Greek history there are many examples of educated and very important women since the beginning of the known history! Not to mention that even the religious Greek Pantheon was composed by 6 male Gods and 6 female Godesses. That before the invasion of Christians, women were participating also in the high ranks of the religion as priestesses, and they were highly respected by kings and warriors! So, what are you talking about? For me, it is obvious that you are ignorant of Greek history, culture and language! And probably prejudiced, I could say.....

Adamantine wrote:I did not call you arrogant: I said your enterprise of trying to improve a language you don't even speak smelled of arrogance. It is not a personal remark: I was critiquing the action. And yes, I do believe this enterprise is one of cultural imperialism. And I never said you were wacky, I said others here thought you were: my interpretation of their comments addressed to you in this thread.

Everybody can go back and read your posts. At least, you could say that you feel a little sorry....

Adamantine wrote:

Dronma wrote:As for your last challenge if we have any great ideas about how to solve these problems... Why don't we start from [b]deleting totally the unacceptable notion: "a woman is an inferior rebirth comparing to a man"?

I don't hold this notion, never did, nor do any of my Lamas or anyone in my sangha that I am aware of. So I wonder who you think it is that is holding this notion. That said, it is certain that women have their own unique obstacles to practice, as do men. Deciding whose obstacles are greater I imagine is a crapshoot, and probably dependent on the individual. I do believe in general that women are credited with having superior potential in many ways. This is something I have heard over and over.

Tulku Kalu Rinpoche is not female, but he had some interesting experiences, which can give some inspiration for a positive reformation.It is not a matter of female VS male, but a need for a healthy balance in all levels.

"My view is as vast as the sky, but my actions are finer than flour" ~ Padmasambhava ~

If I were to consider Buddhism a little too patriarchal, I wouldn't use words like "unmodern", "medieval", or anything like that. I would attribute it more to the simple fact that Buddhism contains many non-Dravidian Vedic elements. Of course Buddhist Tantra does have many Dravidian elements (many Tantric deities, particularly Women Deities, are originally Dravidian), and so I wonder if Buddha Shakyamuni was using Skillful Means to communicate in his time and place and saw that there wouldn't be as much benefit in publicly teaching Tantra, which the Dravidians had already been practicing for some time. Perhaps there were Dravidian Tantric Mother-Goddess venerating Buddhas—who are unknown to the public—who existed long before the time of Buddha Shakyamuni, such as the ancient depictions of Ethiopic or "Negro" Buddhas that H.P. Blavatsky (in the book The Caves and Jungles of Hindoostan, I believe) and the 19th century British Master Mason Godfrey Higgins makes reference to. So even though Tibetan Buddhism is partly Dravidian, it apparently developed perhaps a bit more on the Vedic side.

As for the sexual harassment issue, it's a fine line. Women aren't always the sexually-sensitive people that they are made out to be. They like sex just as much as men, however they often act like they're "good wholesome girls" in order to avoid getting labelled with double-standard terms like "slut", "tramp", etc. terms which are a product of a contrived, hypocritical "civilization". On the one hand, us men shouldn't get emasculated by getting discouraged from expressing our sexual interest in women, yet on the other hand men should treat women right, and go out of our way to understand the difference between a woman who clearly is not interested, and a woman who is putting up a socially-conditioned facade and/or is 'testing' the man who is expressing sexual interest (believe it or not women sometimes test men to see if they'll give up easily or not).

In an ideal world, we would all remain celibate and chaste with Yoga practices and Pranayama, etc. until we are shown in Meditation Visions, Clairvoyance, or Dream Yoga who we should seek out as sexual partners. But since that is not the case for most people, even many Yogins, the next best thing is that men and women be honest about our sexuality, and have a lot of sex with each other which sure beats the hell out of (no pun intended) resorting to things like masturbation, homosexuality, bestiality, pedophilia, etc. (even if a couple of these latter-listed sexual behaviours are not considered immoral by some people, I'm willing to bet that they're all harmful to the Nadi channels).

Regarding Siddhis, I think that they are a product of those who know how to work with dependent-origination on levels that are undreamed of by ordinary people. As far as I know, Siddhis don't actually defy dependent-origination altogether. But it looks like this has already been well covered in this thread.

I've also heard that there are astrological cycles of alternating masculine and feminine predominance, and even cycles within cycles; therefore the current global situation could be partly due to us existing in a relatively large cycle of masculine predominance.

Of course this doesn't mean that we should allow ourselves to remain slaves to 'Demiurgic' sidereal or planetary Genii, or act like misogynist/chauvinist-pigs or nazi-feminists during apparent respective astrological cycles.

Another thing: I'm not in any way condoning the alleged sexual-misconduct that is said to occur within some Sanghas. Like encouraging abortion for example is not cool at all, and would come with some very heavy negative karma.

Although I do wonder too, if in some of these other cases people are acting overly-sensitive and hypocritical about these things, and are creating further problems based on a perceived-problem that really isn't a problem at all.

And I would imagine that a truly qualified Lama would have enough Skillful-Means & Wisdom and control of his or her Thigle, Lung, and Nadis (which are all largely interdependent on one's sexual energy) as to not create the conditions for the said kinds of problems in the first place (but of course no one—including Teachers who still have some karma to pay—is immune to the consequences of unpaid karma, however the consequences may run their course).

Oh and about this:

Even though Tibetan Buddhism is partly Dravidian, it apparently developed perhaps a bit more on the Vedic side.

That is, regarding its structure of ritualism, monks, formalities, etc.

In Buddhism's more practical aspect however, the Vajrayana—of the Higher Tantras especially—of Tibet is much more Tantra oriented, obviously.

Lhug-Pa wrote:In an ideal world, we would all remain celibate and chaste with Yoga practices and Pranayama, etc. until we are shown in Meditation Visions, Clairvoyance, or Dream Yoga who we should seek out as sexual partners. But since that is not the case for most people, even many Yogins, the next best thing is that men and women be honest about our sexuality, and have a lot of sex with each other which sure beats the hell out of (no pun intended) resorting to things like masturbation, homosexuality, bestiality, pedophilia, etc. (even if a couple of these latter-listed sexual behaviours are not considered immoral by some people, I'm willing to bet that they're all harmful to the Nadi channels).

What, that it was suggested that if men and women can't control the flow of Thigle—through their Yogic practices—until they meet a qualified consort, they would be better off having casual sex with each other, that is instead of resorting to harmful-for-the-Nadis sorts of sexual-ish behaviors?

Lhug-Pa wrote:What, that it was suggested that if men and women can't control the flow of Thigle—through their Yogic practices—until they meet a qualified consort, they would be better off having casual sex with each other, that is instead of resorting to other sorts of harmful-for-the-Nadis sexual-ish behaviors?

Yes, indeed. But this is a secret instruction specially for yogis and yoginis. I am not sure that it can be easily applied by everyone....

"My view is as vast as the sky, but my actions are finer than flour" ~ Padmasambhava ~